5 ms·

Which would be a fine outcome. We're entering a real messy period where dignified, decent paying jobs are becoming scarce. All of our philosophies about work an

Which would be a fine outcome. We're entering a real messy period where dignified, decent paying jobs are becoming scarce. All of our philosophies about work and welfare are rooted in a post WWII era where we were essentially rebuilding the world and there was more work than competent people. If we are going to insist that all productivity gains must now go directly to the capital class, we're going to need a UBI, universal healthcare and housing guarantees. I worry that greed is too baked in, and those that have would rather let the world burn before they give the current system up.

afpx 8y ago
Lately, I’ve been in the mood to read recently-published business self-help books. One thing that surprised me was that three of the books had a common premise. They began by describing the habits of some of the most notable people in history (scientists, artists, business people, etc). Then, they went on to say how these habits would be necessary to maintain a job in the new globalized marketplace. Wait, what? So, anyone who wants to have a job in the near-future must emulate the habits of some of the most impressive people in history? Wow. I don’t know if this premise is true or just marketing hyperbole. But, if that’s what workers think is required of them, we are in for a scary future.
- stcredzero 8y ago
  Wait, what? So, anyone who wants to have a job must emulate the habits of some of the most impressive people in history? Wow. Isn't that how a lot of human progress works? The scientific viewpoint was once a pastime of educated elites. Now the world model derived from it is very much mainstream. (Though it isn't 100% universal) Reading, writing, and arithmetic were once elite and esoteric specialist skills, now they are basic requirements. Mercy, humanitarianism, and individual rights are all fairly recent innovations in human history. I don’t know if that’s true or hyperbole, but if that’s what workers think, we are in for a scary future. Or a fantastic one.
  - petra 8y ago
    Viewpoints and skills are teachable, although that can take a lot of effort. But habits ? depending on what habits are we talking about, some are highly related to personality, to willpower, to interpersonal skills,etc and those are really hard to change, or maybe impossible, for some. And if aim so high in changing human beings, is this the best we can do ? to create better money making machines ? And what will that do to our old values - stuff like kindness, family values, creativity for it's own sake ? And will it even work ? Or is being an Elon Musk copy will just become a requirement for working as a barista ?
    - stcredzero 8y ago
      is this the best we can do? to create better money making machines? Of course not. The best AI we could possibly create wouldn't be a paperclip optimizer. Presumably, there could be another AI who would realize and say, Let's not go to Camelot. It is a silly place. And what will that do to our old values - stuff like kindness, family values, creativity for it's own sake? Actually, that's also along the lines of not being a paperclip optimizer. Some people are way too obsessed with sex. There will always be others who will realize that's a bit imbalanced, and decide not to be like that. There will always be people who ask, "Is that all? Is there nothing more?" That, or we'll die out sooner than we should. In other words, if the human mind is really that bounded and limited, some problem of our own making is going to kill us off. Or is being an Elon Musk copy will just become a requirement for working as a barista ? Didn't being a [famous hacker here] clone become a requirement for working as a programmer in the Bay Area? Aren't there towns where all of the baristas have scripts they're working on?
stcredzero 8y ago
With few exceptions, all societies have Pareto distributions. All societies (of any decent size) are also subject to unrest from relative inequality. All successful societies also managed to engage in some form of distribution of power and some form of redistribution of wealth. Distribution of power: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rStL7niR7gs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rStL7niR7gs Perception of relative wealth: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3XYHPAwBzE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3XYHPAwBzE The redistribution of wealth can only be conducted voluntarily or at least somewhat voluntarily, without inviting inter-group conflict. I worry that greed is too baked in, and those that have would rather let the world burn before they give the current system up. Greed is baked in. Sorry, but that's just how people work in groups larger than about 450. However, far seeing elites can preserve the current order by creating works to uplift the common man and create community spaces of pride and joy. [1] This is also borne out in the historical record, as are the consequences when the elites do too little or imprudently do too much. [1] -- I would say that we in the US have forgotten how to create public spaces of worth, and the trend is to take the activities of the common person and stratify them by class. This is a very bad trend, which speaks against the long term viability of our society.
- LarryDarrell 8y ago
  Regarding activity in the US... Do you think it's because we have no cultural knowledge/history of peasants vs the aristocracy? I find that Americans are very confused when discussing class issues and any discussion usually devolves into racism or simple consumerist preferences.
  - JAlexoid 8y ago
    America is a anti-culture society(Americans have little culture that is shared among the absolute majority). At best there are 7-10 major cultural regions in USA. Who's values change as much as you going through Europe... It also broadly matches European cultural differences. So it's hardly surprising that Americans can't define certain things, to span the whole country. It's an ongoing project of Enlightenment, that I'd like to succeed.
  - 8y ago
njarboe 8y ago
Do people really want to have all of their support depend on the government? As an American I know people that don't and even reject government paid food stamps and healthcare, although they are poor enough to qualify for them. I don't think it is very psychologically healthy to be so dependent on things out of your control. A better system would be some system where people can earn a large chunk of capital that basically sets themselves up with enough to have their own basic income that they control. In the old days in America one had the homestead act that would give you 160-640 acres of public land if you could improve it and live on it for 5 years. This program lasted from the 1862 till 1976 if you can believe it. That was a large chunk of capital one could get by working hard at creating wealth. Not sure if a new homestead act could work, but something similar where anyone can volunteer to do some hard and needed work for five years and at the end of it get a good payout that they can use at they see fit. Maybe $250,000. One could start a business, go to college, invest and live off the interest, etc. This I could get behind.
- lazyasciiart 8y ago
  I don't think it's psychologically healthy to deny that you are incredibly dependent on things outside your control already.
  - njarboe 8y ago
    Sure. Only a psychopath would think such a thing. Thinking UBI is not a good idea is not something only psychopaths might believe.
    - lazyasciiart 8y ago
      Not psychopaths, more like people who just don't think things through. Arguing against UBI because you don't want to be dependant on things outside your control is definitely something you have to be in that group for.
      - deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
csomar 8y ago
I disagree. Even the developed world is still lacking in many cities. New York City could be cleaner, have a nicer transit system and guide tourists better. You can also have more TSA workers. There is lots of work to be done even in developed countries.

afpx 8y ago

Lately, I’ve been in the mood to read recently-published business self-help books. One thing that surprised me was that three of the books had a common premise. They began by describing the habits of some of the most notable people in history (scientists, artists, business people, etc). Then, they went on to say how these habits would be necessary to maintain a job in the new globalized marketplace. Wait, what? So, anyone who wants to have a job in the near-future must emulate the habits of some of the most impressive people in history? Wow. I don’t know if this premise is true or just marketing hyperbole. But, if that’s what workers think is required of them, we are in for a scary future.

stcredzero 8y ago
Wait, what? So, anyone who wants to have a job must emulate the habits of some of the most impressive people in history? Wow. Isn't that how a lot of human progress works? The scientific viewpoint was once a pastime of educated elites. Now the world model derived from it is very much mainstream. (Though it isn't 100% universal) Reading, writing, and arithmetic were once elite and esoteric specialist skills, now they are basic requirements. Mercy, humanitarianism, and individual rights are all fairly recent innovations in human history. I don’t know if that’s true or hyperbole, but if that’s what workers think, we are in for a scary future. Or a fantastic one.
- petra 8y ago
  Viewpoints and skills are teachable, although that can take a lot of effort. But habits ? depending on what habits are we talking about, some are highly related to personality, to willpower, to interpersonal skills,etc and those are really hard to change, or maybe impossible, for some. And if aim so high in changing human beings, is this the best we can do ? to create better money making machines ? And what will that do to our old values - stuff like kindness, family values, creativity for it's own sake ? And will it even work ? Or is being an Elon Musk copy will just become a requirement for working as a barista ?
  - stcredzero 8y ago
    is this the best we can do? to create better money making machines? Of course not. The best AI we could possibly create wouldn't be a paperclip optimizer. Presumably, there could be another AI who would realize and say, Let's not go to Camelot. It is a silly place. And what will that do to our old values - stuff like kindness, family values, creativity for it's own sake? Actually, that's also along the lines of not being a paperclip optimizer. Some people are way too obsessed with sex. There will always be others who will realize that's a bit imbalanced, and decide not to be like that. There will always be people who ask, "Is that all? Is there nothing more?" That, or we'll die out sooner than we should. In other words, if the human mind is really that bounded and limited, some problem of our own making is going to kill us off. Or is being an Elon Musk copy will just become a requirement for working as a barista ? Didn't being a [famous hacker here] clone become a requirement for working as a programmer in the Bay Area? Aren't there towns where all of the baristas have scripts they're working on?

stcredzero 8y ago

With few exceptions, all societies have Pareto distributions. All societies (of any decent size) are also subject to unrest from relative inequality. All successful societies also managed to engage in some form of distribution of power and some form of redistribution of wealth. Distribution of power: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rStL7niR7gs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rStL7niR7gs Perception of relative wealth: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3XYHPAwBzE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3XYHPAwBzE The redistribution of wealth can only be conducted voluntarily or at least somewhat voluntarily, without inviting inter-group conflict. I worry that greed is too baked in, and those that have would rather let the world burn before they give the current system up. Greed is baked in. Sorry, but that's just how people work in groups larger than about 450. However, far seeing elites can preserve the current order by creating works to uplift the common man and create community spaces of pride and joy. [1] This is also borne out in the historical record, as are the consequences when the elites do too little or imprudently do too much. [1] -- I would say that we in the US have forgotten how to create public spaces of worth, and the trend is to take the activities of the common person and stratify them by class. This is a very bad trend, which speaks against the long term viability of our society.

LarryDarrell 8y ago
Regarding activity in the US... Do you think it's because we have no cultural knowledge/history of peasants vs the aristocracy? I find that Americans are very confused when discussing class issues and any discussion usually devolves into racism or simple consumerist preferences.
- JAlexoid 8y ago
  America is a anti-culture society(Americans have little culture that is shared among the absolute majority). At best there are 7-10 major cultural regions in USA. Who's values change as much as you going through Europe... It also broadly matches European cultural differences. So it's hardly surprising that Americans can't define certain things, to span the whole country. It's an ongoing project of Enlightenment, that I'd like to succeed.
- 8y ago

njarboe 8y ago

Do people really want to have all of their support depend on the government? As an American I know people that don't and even reject government paid food stamps and healthcare, although they are poor enough to qualify for them. I don't think it is very psychologically healthy to be so dependent on things out of your control. A better system would be some system where people can earn a large chunk of capital that basically sets themselves up with enough to have their own basic income that they control. In the old days in America one had the homestead act that would give you 160-640 acres of public land if you could improve it and live on it for 5 years. This program lasted from the 1862 till 1976 if you can believe it. That was a large chunk of capital one could get by working hard at creating wealth. Not sure if a new homestead act could work, but something similar where anyone can volunteer to do some hard and needed work for five years and at the end of it get a good payout that they can use at they see fit. Maybe $250,000. One could start a business, go to college, invest and live off the interest, etc. This I could get behind.

lazyasciiart 8y ago
I don't think it's psychologically healthy to deny that you are incredibly dependent on things outside your control already.
- njarboe 8y ago
  Sure. Only a psychopath would think such a thing. Thinking UBI is not a good idea is not something only psychopaths might believe.
  - lazyasciiart 8y ago
    Not psychopaths, more like people who just don't think things through. Arguing against UBI because you don't want to be dependant on things outside your control is definitely something you have to be in that group for.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]

csomar 8y ago

I disagree. Even the developed world is still lacking in many cities. New York City could be cleaner, have a nicer transit system and guide tourists better. You can also have more TSA workers. There is lots of work to be done even in developed countries.